Loading document...
==== PAGE 1 ====
21/01444/B Page 1 of 15
PLANNING OFFICER REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Application No. : 21/01444/B Applicant : Mr Ian Kelly Proposal : Erection of 4-bedroomed bungalow, (agricultural worker's dwelling), and erection of agricultural barn and the construction of a private access road. Site Address : Field 321756 & 321758 Braaid Road Braaid IM4 2AW
Planning Officer: Mr Paul Visigah Photo Taken : Site Visit : Expected Decision Level : Planning Committee
Recommendation
Recommended Decision:
Refused Date of Recommendation: 01.08.2022 __
Reasons for Refusal
R : Reasons for Refusal O : Notes attached to reasons
R 1. Housing Policy 7 part (a) of General Policy 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 allow for the construction of new dwellings for agricultural workers where an essential need for such dwellings is established. It is concluded that such an essential need has not been demonstrated in this case such that the application is contrary to these two policies.
R 2. The isolated position of the dwelling within the countryside is not considered appropriate and would harm the character and quality of the landscape. As such, the proposal is concluded to represent an unwarranted development that is detrimental to the amenity of the countryside contrary to the provision of Environment Policies 1 and Housing Policy 9 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
R 3. Given the limited amount of acreage owned by the applicant, the fact that the occupant would be a tenant farmer with limited term security of tenure and where the tenant farmer would not appear to be in need of a dwelling, in addition to the fact that there have been farm dwellings previously associated with some of the farmland being farmed by the applicant, the proposal would fail to accord with General Policy 3, Paragraph 8.9.3, and Housing Policy 7. No justification has been made in the application to explain why an additional agricultural workers dwelling should be provided to service the farms currently operated by the applicants, given that significant proportions of the acreage available to the applicant are already associated with farm dwellings.
R 4. In the absence of agricultural need sufficient to justify the proposed development, the proposed dwelling and barn, and particularly the proposed access lane leading to them and
==== PAGE 2 ====
21/01444/B Page 2 of 15
hardstanding area of farm yard would introduce built development in an area not currently so characterised, in conflict with the Landscape Character Appraisal for Braaid (D10) contained within the Area Plan for the East - which refers to the need to conserve and enhance the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its open large pastoral fields. In addition the development would be contrary to Environment Policies 1 which protect the countryside for its own sake and where the protection of the character of the landscape will be the most important consideration and Environment Policy 15 and Housing Policy 9 which require new development to be built within or next to existing development.
R 5. The design of the dwelling proposed does not reflect the wording of policies 1-7 of Planning Circular 3/91 ('Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside'), and also fails to comply with the wording of Housing Policy 10 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, which requires agricultural dwellings to generally follow those seven policies of the Circular. Insufficient justification has been made in the application to explain why the policies of the Circular or Housing Policy 10 should be set aside. __
Interested Person Status - Additional Persons
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should be given Interested Person Status as they are considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
Bluebell House, Braaid Farm, Braaid Road, White House, The Braaid, Braaid Road, Braaid,
as they satisfy all of the requirements of paragraph 2 of the Department's Operational Policy on Interested Person Status.
It is recommended that the following persons should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 6(4):
Stu Peters MHK (Member for Middle), is not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy.
It is recommended that the owners/occupiers of the following properties should not be given Interested Person Status as they are not considered to have sufficient interest in the subject matter of the application to take part in any subsequent proceedings and are not mentioned in Article 4(2):
Rose Cottage, Braaid Road, Braaid, Holmlea, Braaid Crossroads, Braaid, Deerae, Braaid Road, Braaid, Corvalley House, The Braaid, Braaid Road, Braaid, Hampton Croft, Clannagh Road, Santon, Upper Howe Farm, Old Castletown Road, Braddan
As they are not within 20m of the application site and the development is not automatically required to be the subject of an EIA by Appendix 5 of the Strategic Plan, in accordance with paragraph 2B of the Policy. __
Officer’s Report
==== PAGE 3 ====
21/01444/B Page 3 of 15
THIS APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE REQUEST OF THE HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT
0.0 PREAMBLE 0.1 This application was originally on the agenda for 20.06.22 and was deferred at the applicant's request. Since then, no additional information has been received however, the applicant has asked for it to be determined. The report is unchanged.
1.0 THE SITE 1.1 The application site comprises Field 321756 & 321758 which is situated on the northwest side of Braaid Road (A26). The red line area measures about 2.29 acres and has its longest boundary where the access would be located measuring about 193m, although a significant section of this stretch of boundary (about 80m) is only about 9m wide. There are no trees within the site area, although the site boundary is almost enclosed by sod bank. The wider area, edged in blue lies to the south west in the form of two fields (fields 321755 and 321758). There is currently a field access into the field to the southeast end of the site and onto the Braaid Road.
1.2 The site is situated within an open part of Braaid with the elevated nature of the site relative to the level of and the position of the nearest building group making it prominent from these positions. There are currently no dwellings or farm building within the site or within close proximity, with the closest building group located along Foxdale Road situated about 103m from the site boundary and about 130m from the proposed building location on the application site. The site is also within an existing group of farm buildings.
2.0 THE PROPOSAL 2.1 The application seeks approval for the erection of 4-bedroomed bungalow, (agricultural worker's dwelling), and erection of agricultural barn and the construction of a private access road.
2.2 The dwelling would be a two storey farmhouse design with an attached single storey pitch roofed section on the north-eastern elevation (which would serve dogs to be trained on site), finished in white painted render finish. The dwelling would also feature a pitch roofed open entrance porch, and two chimneys on both two storey gables. Windows on the property would be UPVC units, and the dwelling would feature a pitch roof covered in mock slate roof tiles with solar panels laid over the front roof plane. Three rooflights would be installed on the front roof plane, while four rooflights would be installed on the rear roof plane. There would be an integral garage on the front elevation. It has also been indicated that air source heat pump would be installed at the property, although no details in terms of specification and position has been provided.
2.3 The core section of the new dwelling would be 16m long, 9.9m wide, and 6.9m high to roof ridge (3.4m to the eaves), while the single storey section would be 3.7m wide, 6.7m long, and 4.9m high (2.5m to the eaves).
2.3 The scheme also proposes to erect an agricultural barn at the rear of the new dwelling which would measure about 18.2m (60ft) and 9.1m (30ft). No details have been provided on the height, roof finish, external wall finish and appearance of the barn.
2.4 The site would also feature four new parking spaces that would be positioned by the new private access that would connect the site to the A 26, while a new septic tank would be built outside the redline boundary but within the area marked in blue boundary. A new land drain would be installed to carry run-off water away from the roadside edge. The existing entrance would also be widened for better visibility.
==== PAGE 4 ====
21/01444/B Page 4 of 15
2.5 It has also been indicated on the submitted plan and supporting information that the applicant intends to run a sheep dog training and grooming business from the site, although it is not clear how many dogs would be catered for and how this business would use the site. The agent, however, states that the dogs would be kept with the applicant for about two months.
2.6 The applicant has provided details of the standard labour unit requirements which suggests that the farm is a substantial farm that would benefit from a farm workers dwelling to cater for the applicants who are engaged in agriculture. The land available to the main applicant to farm amounts to 328 acres (5 acres owned). 20 acres of forage crop are sown annually and 20 acres of reseeding takes place. The applicant owns 480 breeding ewes, 80 replacement ewes and 10 rams. The majority of the lambs are sold fat to Isle of Man Meats with some stock sold as breeding stock to other farmers. His labour requirement of 2.2 standard labour units.
2.7 The applicant's son who operates a separate business but shares resources with the main applicant operates a farm business that extends to 139 acres. He owns 250 breeding ewes, 30 replacement ewes, 8 rams and 6 cattle. He has a standard labour requirement of 1.09 (SLU's).
2.7.1 Summary: o Combined, the farming operations have a labour requirement of 3.29 standard labour units. o Currently, for both parties, all ewes are lambed outdoors through a 6-week period commencing in April. o The son farms on leased land at Ballachrink, Hillberry and some at Ashley hill. o The main applicants operations are based at Ballacorris farm, St Marks along with other parcels of land at Ballagick, Knock Froy, Cordeman, Close Clarke and Hampton Croft along with other smaller land parcels. o Both parties are farming on long established rental agreements (5 years plus). o The applicants currently reside at Ballanicolas Farmhouse, St Marks, which is leased. There is no land or buildings available at Ballanicolas. o The provision of a dwelling will provide Both Mr Ian Kelly and Darren Kelly security of residence and also provide a permanent base from which to operate their agricultural businesses from. o Both parties are not in a position to purchase a dwelling, however combined they have the potential to build a property suitable for them all. o Agriculturally tied houses in the area that come to the market are very rare and Mr Ian Kelly has researched available tied houses with no success. o Both Businesses are Red Tractor Farm Assured, selling their produce to Isle of Man Meats. o The proposed agricultural building would provide 167m2 to house ewes. Mr Ian Kelly currently has a leased building at Ballacorris available to him which is 418m2. Housing the ewes would require 1325m2 leaving a shortfall of 727m2 between both buildings. o The building at Ballacorris is too far away to consider housing and early lambing ewes due to the travel time involved and the increased level of observation and attention required during lambing. o The applicant also trains and sells sheepdogs. Travelling to various parcels of land, sometimes, twice daily, sometimes three times a day to see and train his animals is at least 7.2 mile round trip (to the nearest parcel) which is far from Ideal. Having the suitable facilities on site to would reduce the need to travel as frequently and improve the training. o The reduced traveling would not only save on fuel bills but also reduce the businesses carbon footprint.
2.8 The applicants have also provided a detailed Planning Statement which clearly articulates the following:
==== PAGE 5 ====
21/01444/B Page 5 of 15
o Attempts have been made to acquire a dwelling, but failed due to the costs of the properties. o The applicants currently live in a privately rented accommodation, but they have no security for the future, and it is some distance away from the land they farm. o The need for a new working farm to be returned to Braaid. o The house and barn are both essential for the 467 acres that the applicant and their son currently farm. o The house would ideally be situated in the centre of the land that they own, which would make management of the fields much easier particularly at lambing time. o Reinforces the details of the sheep dog business operated by the applicant and indicates that the sheep dog training would be done on the surrounding fields to the proposed new farmhouse. o The house has been designed, in the traditional vernacular and to be as 'in keeping' as possible with the surrounding area o The dwelling will be environmentally friendly, with the aid of solar panels and air source heat pump and it would be thermally insulated to a high degree.
2.9 Additional Correspondence has also been provided by the applicant's agent (dated 9 May 2022), which states the following: "The Sheepdog Training referred to in the letter from the applicant supporting his planning application is a very small side-line to his main occupation of running a full-time sheep farm. Occasionally another farmer will drop off a young dog that he would like to use as a sheepdog. The applicant keeps the dog for up to 2 months usually and trains it to work with his own sheep, then when the dog is fully trained the owner will collect it and that will be the end of the training period. The sheepdog training will have no impact on any aspect of concern to Highways either in terms of traffic or parking issues, nor will it affect any neighbours in any way".
2.10 Following further comments from DOI Highways Drainage dated 13 May 2022, the applicants have provided a revised site plan following guidance provided by DOI Highways Drainage.
3.0 PLANNING POLICY 3.1 The site lies within an area designated on the Area Plan for the East as land not zoned for a particular purpose. The site is not within a Conservation Area or prone to flood risks. There are no registered trees on the site, and the site is not within a registered tree area.
3.2 The Following parts of the Area Plan for the East Written Statement are considered relevant in the determination of this application:
3.2.1 Landscape Character Assessment - Braaid (D10) "Landscape Strategy - Conserve and enhance: a) the character, quality and distinctiveness of the area, with its open large pastoral fields; b) its Manx hedges; c) its scattered farm houses fringed by trees; d) its sunken and enclosed rural road network and its numerous archaeological features.
Key Views: Extensive uninterrupted panoramic views from higher points over large open fields and Greeba Valley and the northern Uplands and eastwards to the built-up edge of Douglas. Some glimpsed views over fields from most sections of roads, which are enclosed by high grassed Manx hedgerows for the most part."
3.3 Given the site location and nature of the proposed scheme, the following parts of the Strategic Plan area considered relevant:
==== PAGE 6 ====
21/01444/B Page 6 of 15
3.4 Environment Policy 1: "The countryside and its ecology will be protected for its own sake. For the purposes of this policy, the countryside comprises all land which is outside the settlements defined in Appendix 3 at A.3.6 or which is not designated for future development on an Area Plan. Development which would adversely affect the countryside will not be permitted unless there is an over-riding national need in land use planning terms which outweighs the requirement to protect these areas and for which there is no reasonable and acceptable alternative."
3.5 General Policy 3 sets out a presumption against development in the countryside but includes instances where provision of new housing may be acceptable, including "(f) building and engineering operations which are essential for the conduct of agriculture or forestry." Further advice on agricultural development is provided as follows:
3.5.1 Paragraph 7.3.13 "In terms of new agricultural dwellings, permission will not be granted unless real agricultural need is demonstrated and will in every case be assessed in terms of need, sensitive siting, design, and size, and be subject to an agricultural occupancy condition."
3.5.2 Paragraph 7.13.4 "It is recognised that there have been considerable changes in the economy in the last twenty years. The number of people in full time agricultural employment has reduced for a number of reasons including increased mechanisation, reductions in the number of farms; and increases in the size of farm holdings. In many cases smaller farms have been amalgamated into larger units to increase economic viability. This has often been accompanied by the sale of former farmhouses and cottages to those who do not earn their employment in agriculture. At the same time there has been an increase in part time involvement in farming either where the income from agriculture is supplemented by other employment or where the person's main employment is not in agriculture but they farm on a part time basis. In considering the applications for new houses in the countryside the Department will give careful consideration to agriculture justification based on full time employment in agriculture. See also Section 8.9 in Chapter 8 - Housing."
3.6 Environment Policy 15: "Where the Department is satisfied that there is agricultural or horticultural need for a new building (including a dwelling), sufficient to outweigh the general policy against development in the countryside, and that the impact of this development including buildings, accesses, servicing etc. is acceptable, such development must be sited as close as is practically possible to existing building groups and be appropriate in terms of scale, materials, colour, siting and form to ensure that all new developments are sympathetic to the landscape and built environment of which they will form a part.
Only in exceptional circumstances will buildings be permitted in exposed or isolated areas or close to public highways and in all such cases will be subject to appropriate landscaping. The nature and materials of construction must also be appropriate to the purposes for which it is intended.
Where new agricultural buildings are proposed next to or close to existing residential properties, care must be taken to ensure that there is no unacceptable adverse impact through any activity, although it must be borne in mind that many farming activities require buildings which are best sited, in landscape terms, close to existing building groups in the rural landscape."
3.7 "8.9 New Agricultural Dwellings 8.9.1 As is indicated in Chapter 7 (at Section 7.14), permission will not be granted for new agricultural dwellings in the countryside unless there is real agricultural need demonstrated sufficient to off-set the general planning objections to new dwellings in the countryside.
==== PAGE 7 ====
21/01444/B Page 7 of 15
8.9.2 Agricultural need should be established having regard to: (a) what living accommodation has been built on, or in association with the farm holding in the past, and how it is now occupied; and (b) who will occupy the proposed dwelling, and what role they will play in the operation of the farm; in some circumstances, there will be a legitimate need for a dwelling for a retiring farmer who proposes to vacate the farmhouse but to continue to assist on the farm."
3.8 Housing Policy 7: "New agricultural dwellings will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances where real agricultural need is demonstrated."
3.8.1 Paragraph 8.9.3: "In judging whether the need is sufficient to over-ride other policies, particular regard will be had to:- (a) the previous or proposed severance of land and buildings; (b) the agricultural justification for sub-division of a farm; (c) the long-term viability of new or unproven agricultural enterprises such as smallholdings, market gardens, or horticulture; (d) the extent to which the applicant's employment in agriculture is only part-time; and (e) in the case of a retiring farmer, whether the proposal would result in vacation of an existing farm dwelling for agricultural use, and whether the applicant would continue to assist in the operation of the farm."
3.9 Housing Policy 8: "Where permission is granted for an agricultural dwelling, a condition will be attached restricting the occupation to a person engaged or last engaged solely in agriculture; or a widow or widower of such a person, or any resident dependants."
3.9.1 "8.9.4 Such a condition will not usually be removed on subsequent applications unless it is shown that the long-term need for dwellings for agricultural workers, both on the particular farm and in the locality, no longer warrants reserving the dwelling for that purpose."
3.9.2 "8.9.5 If it is not possible for the farm worker to live in the nearest village, the siting of the proposed dwelling should be selected having regard to the various landscape policies in Chapter 7. In particular, the dwelling should self-evidently form part of the farm group."
3.10 Housing Policy 9: "Where permission is granted for an agricultural dwelling, the dwelling must be sited such that; (a) it is within or immediately adjoining the main group of farm buildings or a group of farm buildings associated with that farm, (b) it is well set back from any public highway, and (c) it is approached via the existing farm access."
3.10.1 "8.9.6 The design of the building should also have regard to the various landscape policies, such as to preserve the character of the local landscape."
3.11 Housing Policy 10: "Where permission is granted for an agricultural dwelling, the dwelling should normally be designed in accordance with policies 1- 7 of present Planning Circular 3/91 which will be revised and issued as a Planning Policy Statement."
3.12 Environment Policy 4 protects biodiversity (including protected species and designated sites).
3.13 Environment Policy 14: Development which would result in the permanent loss of important and versatile agricultural land (Classes 1-2) will not be permitted except where there is an overriding need for the development, and land of a lower quality is not available and other policies in this plan are complied with. This policy will be applied to (a) land annotated as Classes 1/2 on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map; and
==== PAGE 8 ====
21/01444/B Page 8 of 15
(b) Class 2 soils falling within areas annotated as Class 2/3 and Class 3/2 on the Agricultural Land Use Capability Map.
3.14 Transport Policy 1: New development should, where possible, be located close to existing public transport facilities and routes, including pedestrian, cycle and rail routes.
4.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 Planning Circular 3/91 'Guide to the Design of Residential Development in the Countryside. 4.1.1 Policy 2: "New buildings are to be integrated with the landscape and where in groups, with each other. Single buildings in prominent locations can only be considered if they are satisfactory in all reports and include landscape proposals."
4.1.2 Policy 3: "The shape of small and medium sized new dwellings should follow the size and pattern of traditional farmhouses. They should be rectangular in plain and simple in form. "
4.1.3 Policy 4: "External finishes are expected to be selected from a limited range of traditional materials."
4.1.4 Policy 5: "Doors and windows together with their size and relationship with each other and the wall face should follow traditional rural forms."
4.2 Whilst not adopted planning policy, DEFA's Residential Design Guide (2021) is a material consideration in the assessment of this application as, "It is intended to apply to any residential development within existing villages and towns, including individual houses, conversions and householder extensions. It is envisaged that separate guidance will be provided for dwellings in the countryside, although some of the broad principles set out within this document may still be relevant to such proposals". Sections 2.0 on Sustainable Construction, 3.0 on New Homes, and 5.0 on Architectural Details are particularly relevant.
5.0 PLANNING HISTORY 5.1 The application site has not been the subject of any previous planning applications.
6.0 REPRESENTATIONS Copies of representations received can be viewed on the government's website. This report contains summaries only.
6.1 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Division that previously asked for additions and amendments on 21 January 2021, have indicated that the amended proposal is acceptable subject to no further intensification of use and for conditions to apply to any planning permission granted covering the following (13 April 2022): a) Vehicle access, surface water drainage, land drain, and internal pedestrian and vehicle layout, excluding visibility splays to Proposed Block Plan. b) Visibility splays - further details to be submitted for approval at 2.4 x 90m in each direction / to be provided at 2.4 x 90m in each direction, and to be kept clear at a height not exceeding 1.05m. c) Gate(s) - to open inwards. d) Surfacing - The application hereby approved shall surface the driveway connecting to the highway with a consolidated and bound surfacing material between the gate and the carriageway edge of the adjacent public highway. e) Restriction on use - to limit further commercialisation.
6.2 The Department of Infrastructure (DOI) Highways Drainage consultation: 6.2.1 They initially asked for additional information with regard to the private drainage arrangements for the driveway in their consultation dated 18th February 2022.
==== PAGE 9 ====
21/01444/B Page 9 of 15
6.2.2 Following submission of revised plan by the applicants to address their concerns on 9 April 2022, they have made further comments in an email dated 13 May 2022. There comments states that they would be satisfied with a linear drainage channel located at the bottom of the proposed driveway to intercept surface water runoff from it before it drains onto the highway. They further suggested that the channel is connected to an existing culvert in the field to the north east via a minimum 100mm diameter pipe (with an attached sketch provided as guidance on how this could be done).
6.3 DEFA Agriculture and Lands Directorate has made the following comments regarding the application in an email dated 21 April 2022: o The applicant who is a claimant under the Agriculture Development Scheme has lived at Ballanicholas Farm. The house is surrounded by the fields which were associated with the farm in the past but this land is now farmed by another farmer. o The applicant's son who is also an ADS claimant has a postal address in Douglas. o From the figures submitted, the land farmed, as they do, would appear to generate a requirement for 2.43 men. o If Sheep are lambed indoors they need to be turned out to grass virtually straight away (within 48hrs max). The proposed new shed is a long way from most of Mr Kelly's fields. Moving to lambing inside would on the face of it create a need for many long journeys returning ewes and lambs to fields after lambing. These sheep will need to be checked regularly post lambing to reduce predation. o The new house would be no better placed than Ballanicholas as far as checking stock is concerned.
6.4 Marown Parish Commissioners oppose the application on the following grounds (18 February 2022/22 April 2022): o The area is not zoned for residential use under the Area Plan for the East thought it is noted that an agricultural workers dwelling is sought. o The details of the Rural Business Consultancy does not demonstrate that there is a requirement for an additional dwelling in the countryside. o The dwelling as proposed would be prominent in the landscape, as would the agricultural barn due to the slope of the land. o General Policy 3 states that 'essential housing' for Agricultural workers may be permitted under certain conditions. It is submitted that this proposed dwelling is not essential for the reasons stated above. o The Location does not pass the test of Housing Policy 9 (a).
6.5 The owners/occupiers of the following properties object to the application: 6.5.1 Rose Cottage, Braaid Road, Braaid, (1 February 2022); 6.5.2 Bluebell House, Braaid Farm, Braaid Road (7 February 2022/5 May 2022); 6.5.3 White House, The Braaid, Braaid Road, Braaid (5 February 2022/27 April 2022/5 May 2022); 6.5.3 Holmlea, Braaid Crossroads, Braaid (10 February 2022); 6.5.5 Deerae, Braaid Road, Braaid (10 February 2022); 6.5.6 Corvalley House, The Braaid, Braaid Road, Braaid (10 March 2022/6 May 2022);
6.5.7 Their comments border on the following issues: o The application includes dog training which will cause noise in the area, and generate further traffic. o The application states that no working farm is in the area which is incorrect as Chibbanagh farm borders the Cross Roads. o The proposed site is not zoned for development and the applicant's reason for the application, in our opinion is not justifiable. o The proposed site is not big enough to be run as a farm (5 Acres), the intention and danger in our opinion is that it will be used instead as a residential dwelling and a central hub/base for the applicant's wider farming activities.
==== PAGE 10 ====
21/01444/B Page 10 of 15
o The proposed siting of what is a new dwelling would be contrary to General Policy 3. o Whilst there is an exception regarding essential housing for agricultural workers but feel that it is not warranted in this case as it does not meet Housing Policy 7 because real agricultural need cannot be demonstrated. o In regards to Housing Policy 9 and environment policy, the development would be very apparent from public view that it is a separate entity unconnected to any existing farm holding. o The siting of the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the surrounding countryside, as the proposed development would sit higher than other properties in the hamlet and be apparent. o If approved, the development would be contrary to the stated aim of the Strategic Plan to protect the countryside for its own sake (Environment Policy 1). o The access to and from the proposed site for any farm vehicles would need to be large and would certainly be very dangerous given the current 40 mile speed limit and the close proximity of the proposed entrance to the roundabout. o The proposal is also contrary to Strategic Policy 2, 5 and Environment Policy 1 which seek to ensure new development is directed to sustainable locations and that the character o the countryside is protected for its own sake. o The scheme also fails Environment Policy 15 in terms of proximity as it is not sited close to an existing budding group. o They note that there is a property on the market with Dean Wood reference DCP01126 sited in a plot of one acre, which is in closer proximity to several of the applicant's rented fields and could perhaps be better placed for his needs. o The entrance will result in a significant loss of established Manx hedge. o The scheme would alter the character of the hamlet. o The development would adversely affect views to the Braaid Ancient monument dues to its proximity. The scheme would be contrary to Environment Policy 40.
6.6 The following persons and owners/occupiers of the following properties support the application: 6.6.1 Hampton Croft, Clannagh Road, Santon (22 February 2022); 6.6.2 Upper Howe Farm, Old Castletown Road (12 May 2022);
6.6.3 Their comments border on the following issues: o They mention the fact that the dwelling would serve the needs of the family. o They state that some sheep would need care around the clock. o They state that as farm labour is in such short supply, there is an ever increasing workload placed on farmers and as many tasks as possible must be done efficiently - wasting time driving any distance in the middle of the night unnecessarily is neither efficient nor healthy. o They note that lambing sheds and sheep dog training are not noisy. o Other matters referred to relate to personal circumstances of the applicants family.
6.6.4 Stu Peters MHK (Member for Middle), 15 Murray's Lake Drive, Santon (28 February 2022); He states that: o He has a number of farmers as constituents, and without exception all the working farmers (as opposed to pure landowners) who have been saddled with a crippling increase in raw materials costs. o We must therefore do all we can to support them, and if that includes building a modest agricultural worker's house (with the expected limitations attached) and a small barn.
6.7 The applicant has provided a number of responses to the comments by neighbours and consultees (21 February 2022/9 May 2022) There comments relate to: o History of the family's engagement in Agriculture at Braaid farm.
==== PAGE 11 ====
21/01444/B Page 11 of 15
The dogs would be trained whilst working on the applicants sheep at the main base throughout the day, but would receive a bit more training of an evening on their own. o Other matters referred to include drainage issues, character of the locality, controls offered by agricultural worker's conditions. o They address comments made by the DEFA head of Agriculture regarding current residence at Ballanicholas farm house, and applicant's son's residence.
7.0 ASSESSMENT 7.1 With regard to the current application, the key considerations in assessing the application are: i. The Principle of the Development - Agricultural Justification; ii. The siting and design of the development proposed; iii. Environmental Concerns; iv. Highway safety matters; and v. Impact on neighbouring amenity.
7.2 The Principle of the Development - Agricultural Justification (GP3, EP 15, HP7) 7.2.1 There is a general presumption against new development and housing in the countryside, as per the IOMSP policies outlined in section 3 of this report. This strict approach prevents the gradual loss of open countryside on the Island. One exception is where there is an established agricultural need for a farm workers dwelling, which is the basis on which this application is therefore assessed.
7.2.2 Housing Policy 7 states that new agricultural dwellings will only be permitted in the exceptional circumstances where real agricultural need is demonstrated. There is no dispute, on the basis of the evidence submitted, that the farm operation is substantial and sufficient to require a number of full-time agricultural workers to facilitate the daily running of the farm. This, however, is not the fundamental test, as there are many people (indeed, probably the majority) that are employed far from their place of residence: the main issue is whether or not it is essential that the applicants reside at the proposed location which is positionally detached from majority of the farm sites they operate.
7.2.3 The applicant's case is that it would be useful to have them reside at the proposed site on the basis that the new dwelling would offer them security of residence and also provide a permanent base from which to operate their agricultural businesses from. They also argue that the building at Ballacorris is too far away to consider housing and early lambing ewes due to the travel time involved and the increased level of observation and attention required during lambing, whilst maintaining that the site would further serve their sheepdog training business which requires travel to various parcels of land, sometimes, twice daily, sometimes three times a day to see and train his animals. Granting this may well be the case, this does not sufficiently represent agricultural need for the new dwelling at the proposed site. In this case, as the farm business is spread over a number of areas, having the dwelling at the proposed site would not offer an advantage over the current situation and adherence to such a suggestion would result
==== PAGE 12 ====
21/01444/B Page 12 of 15
in a farm dwelling being on every parcel of land which is owned and managed for agricultural purposes.
7.2.4 The argument for the new dwelling is further blurred by the fact that it would appear that some of the sites which the applicant farms have had access to farm houses or agricultural worker's dwellings (Ballacorris Farm, Hillberry Farm, Ballagick and Knock Froy Farm). It would be vital to note here that Paragraph 8.9.2 (a) clearly states that agricultural need should be established having regard to "what living accommodation has been built on, or in association with the farm holding in the past, and how it is now occupied". Given the above, it would be difficult to argue that a new agricultural workers dwelling be provided to serve these farms, which have had the benefit of agricultural workers dwellings and for which no argument has been advanced to indicate why these dwellings which should be attached to these farms are not available to the applicant or why these farms should benefit from the provision of an additional agricultural workers dwelling as required by part (e) of Paragraph 8.9.3 of the Strategic Plan, considering the fields and farm buildings on these sites are available to the applicant for their farm business and form the core of their operations.
7.2.5 It must also be taken into account that leased land which accounts for most of the applicant's farmland may change hands and given that the tenancy agreement appears to be within the range of 5 years plus (which may run out before the dwelling is completed), and there is very little security that the current rental situation will continue into the future. This is particularly worrying in terms of establishing agricultural need. What may happen then is that the applicants may choose not to renew the agreement, or that the lands currently being farmed are no longer available to him, and the next tenant may not need a dwelling because they have a dwelling elsewhere, or manage the land in a way which does not require an on-site presence. It would then be difficult to argue that a holding of no more than 6 acres necessitates a dwelling on site sufficient to prevent any agricultural occupancy condition being removed in the future, particularly as much of the land (fields) within close proximity to the application site are being farmed as part of a larger agricultural holding and offering limited room for the applicants future farm expansion at the application site.
7.2.6 Another factor that weights against the proposed scheme is the fact that majority of the farm buildings which support the farm operations are elsewhere. It would appear that if approval was granted for an agricultural workers dwelling, the optimal location is not here where there are limited buildings and where it is unlikely that the majority of the calving or lambing would take place due to the lack of buildings and limited field capacity. Given the scale of the agricultural operations as articulated in the applicants supporting statement, it is clearly not essential to have a dwelling on the application site as a new dwelling here would require more associated agricultural buildings to enable the farm operations which would not be sustainable when the limited land size is factored in.
7.2.7 Also of relevance is the applicant's intention for the new agricultural dwelling to provide security for the family at the application site. There is no provision in the Strategic Plan to allow a farmer to construct a dwelling on the basis of securing a residence for the family. Such a stated intention does not enable the Department to conclude that the long-term prospects for the agricultural dwelling at the site are anything but speculative, and an avenue to allow a residential development in the open countryside not zoned for development.
7.2.8 Additionally, the DEFA Head of Agriculture and Lands Directorate whose advise the Department gives significant weight when dealing with issues bordering on agricultural justification and need for proposed developments has evaluated the details of the scheme, and argues that there is no agricultural justification for the development, with reasons well- articulated in his email dated 21 April 2022 and summarised in section 6.3 of this report.
7.2.9 Given the issues highlighted above, it is considered that the application as submitted does not provide a satisfactory case, and nor does it indicate a longer-term need for a dwelling
==== PAGE 13 ====
21/01444/B Page 13 of 15
with an agricultural occupancy condition at this location. As such, the justification for the proposed dwelling is insufficient to represent agricultural need which would satisfy General Policy 3, Environment Policy 15 or Housing Policy 7.
7.3 Siting and Design (EP1, EP 15, HP 9 and 10) 7.3.1 In terms of siting and design, a number of the aforementioned policies are key in this assessment. In addition to Environment Policy 1 which broadly covers the protection of the countryside, Environment Policy 15 and Housing Policy 9 (a) make clear that any new agricultural dwelling must be sited within or immediately adjoining the main group of farm buildings or a group of farm buildings associated with that farm, or as close as is practically possible to existing building groups, as well as being well set back from any public highway, and it is approached via the existing farm access. Both policies seek to reduce the landscape impact of new agricultural development by ensuring that new development stays within existing building clusters. The proposed development only accords with the requirement to be well set back from any public highway but in landscape terms, the benefit of that is reduced by the proposed driveway which both creates a visual impact that isn't currently there as well as drawing more attention to the new buildings. Whilst a field access currently exists where the new driveway would be located, the benefits offered by using the existing field access would be minimal comparative to the impact the new driveway would have on the landscape as it appears the field access only offer occasional access to the field.
7.3.2 It is also noted that the new property would be one and half storey which will reduce its impact on the landscape. It will, nevertheless be a new development of two buildings covering a total footprint of 350.2sqm (183.2sqm for the dwelling and 167sqm for the agricultural barn), located where there are currently no buildings. Furthermore, the impact of the buildings will be exacerbated by the introduction of the associated parking/farm yard hardstanding areas, which would also serve to alter the character of the landscape. It is, therefore, considered that the siting and resulting impact of the buildings and driveway would not comply with the provisions of Environment Policies 1 and 15, and Housing Policy 9.
7.3.3 Design specifics are also covered by planning policy to an extent when it comes to the design of new dwellings in the countryside. Generally, traditional farmhouse or cottage design features are preferred (See Housing Policy 10), although this depends on the specific site context, and in some cases contemporary dwellings of outstanding design may be acceptable. In this case, the proposed dwelling is neither of traditional form or a modern dwelling as it would be difficult to fit the design stipulations for a traditional dwelling or contemporary dwelling. Whilst it seeks to offer a traditional appeal with chimneys on both gable ends, what is proposed exceeds the recommended dimension of 11.0m x 5.5m for traditional properties (Its main core is 16m x 9.9m) and its increased size does not follow the guide to achieving variations to floor area by lengthening or shortening building lengths (proportional increase or decrease in floor areas) stipulated within the supporting text to Policy 2 of the guide, and the property has an integral garage which is in no way a traditional feature. The property also does not have a central entrance, while the windows are also not symmetrical or in comparatively small openings relative to the dominant area of solid wall surface as required by Planning Circular 3/91. In fact, there is no uniform window size on all the elevations. It is, therefore, considered that the design of the dwelling would be averse to the requirements of Housing Policy 10.
7.4 Environmental Concerns (EP1, EP 4 and EP 14) 7.4.1 The site in question is grazing land, and therefore would not see the loss of any particularly ecological feature in terms of the ground itself, although the works to create the access holds the potential to impact on biota on the sod hedge given that it could serve as habitat for wildlife. As no objections have been received from the Ecosystem Policy team, it is, therefore, considered that environmental concerns relate mainly to the loss of agricultural land in terms of the curtilage of the proposed dwelling which is mainly Class 3 soils. Noting that Class 3 land characteristics can be summarised as land with moderate limitations which restrict
==== PAGE 14 ====
21/01444/B Page 14 of 15
the choice of crops and/or demand careful management; it is not considered that this loss would be sufficient to warrant refusal for a the proposed dwelling.
7.5 Highway Safety (TP 1 & EP 15) 7.5.1 As already indicated, access to the dwelling would be achieved from creating a new access to the site via the existing field access by the highway. The new access is concluded to be acceptable by Highway Services subject to conditions and, though the Braaid Road is busy and visibility not particularly good to the north of the access due to the position of barn and trees by the highway, there does not seem to be sufficient reason to take a different view on this point. Given the above, it is considered that any highway safety concerns would not be sufficient to warrant refusal of the scheme.
7.6 Impact on neighbouring amenity (EP 15) 7.6.1 In terms of impact on those in adjacent properties, there would be limited impact due to the position of the development some distance (minimum of 100m to the nearest dwelling). Whilst the proposed access will formalise a vehicular entry and exit to and from the field, close to Bluebell House Braaid Farm, this property is situated on the other side of the highway and as such it is not considered that the new access would impede or hinder access and entry to this neighbouring property. Based on the foregoing, it is not considered that the proposed development will have an adverse impact on the living conditions of those in adjacent properties.
8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 It is not considered that there is sufficient agricultural need for the proposed dwelling to overcome the presumption against development as set out in General Policy 3, Environment Policy 1 and Housing Policy 7. In addition, the siting and the introduction of the new access would have an adverse impact on the character of this part of the countryside, contrary to Environment Policies 1 and 15, and Housing Policy 9.
9.0 INTERESTED PERSON STATUS 9.1 By virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Development Procedure) Order 2019, the following persons are automatically interested persons: (a) the applicant (including an agent acting on their behalf); (b) any Government Department that has made written representations that the Department considers material; (c) the Highways Division of the Department of Infrastructure; (d) Manx National Heritage where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (e) Manx Utilities where it has made written representations that the Department considers material; (f) the local authority in whose district the land the subject of the application is situated; and (g) a local authority adjoining the authority referred to in paragraph (f) where that adjoining authority has made written representations that the Department considers material.
9.2 The decision maker must determine: o whether any other comments from Government Departments (other than the Department of Infrastructure Highway Services Division) are material; and o whether there are other persons to those listed in Article 6(4) who should be given Interested Person Status.
9.3 The Department of Environment Food and Agriculture is responsible for the determination of planning applications. As a result, where officers within the Department make comments in a professional capacity they cannot be given Interested Person Status. __
==== PAGE 15 ====
21/01444/B Page 15 of 15
I confirm that this decision has been made by the Planning Committee in accordance with the authority afforded to that body by the appropriate DEFA Delegation and that in making this decision the Committee has agreed the recommendation in relation to who should be afforded Interested Person Status.
Decision Made : Refused
Committee Meeting Date: 08.08.2022
Signed : P VISIGAH
Presenting Officer
Further to the decision of the Committee an additional report/condition reason was required (included as supplemental paragraph to the officer report).
Signatory to delete as appropriate YES/NO See below
Customer note
This copy of the officer report reflects the content of the file copy and has been produced in this form for the benefit of our online services/customers and archive records.
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal